I WAS DISHEARTENED to see the Marin Independent Journal, in its Feb. 21 editorial, take sides with the proponents of the Downtown Novato Business Improvement District (BID). I was especially bothered to see what wasn't in the editorial.

The IJ's argument for the BID was uninspired, peppered with formulaic platitudes ("a healthy, busy and vibrant downtown is good business") and premature, pie-in-the-sky assertions ("this management makeover is headed in the right direction").

However, what was most disconcerting with the IJ's stance was a glaring omission that is quite ironic given the issues BID members have had with the Downtown Novato Business Association. This group doubles as the BID advisory board and spends the BID money each year.

One of the issues has been a lack of transparency regarding financials and meeting minutes. Another was the problem of vendors (businesses that benefitted financially from the BID) occupying positions on the marketing committee.

Questions surrounding these issues still exist and that's why there should be an independent audit of the BID's books and reporting procedures.

But that's another issue for another day.

What really bothered me from a journalistic and ethical standpoint was what wasn't acknowledged by the editorial. The IJ benefits financially from the BID fees in question.

A Oct. 21 letter from the DNBA to the BID membership talks about the aforementioned marketing committee contracting with the Marin IJ for the second half of 2013 for advertising.

Also, at the Dec. 4 DNBA meeting, then-president Tom Atkin talked about getting a better deal with the Marin IJ compared with the Novato Advance. Even though this information is not in the meeting minutes (again, obviously an ongoing problem, even with the "new" leadership), I was there and taking notes.

The IJ should acknowledge this relationship, especially when it's offering an opinion on the issue.

I would also call the IJ on its journalistic rigor, or lack thereof, in preparing this editorial.

Here's a sampling:

 Talked about "4,000 businesses" receiving our survey (for whatever reason, the editorial chooses to call it a "petition"). Actually the number is closer to 400.

 Talked about how the DNBA "has responded to criticism about its budgetary practices by posting its finances on its website." Where? As of Feb. 21, financials had not been posted.

 Incorrectly wrote that BID fees range from $79 to $525. Actually the low end is $65.

 Incorrectly described the DNBA as "Novato's BID." It merely serves in an advisory and administrative capacity to the BID. The city of Novato could choose another organization for this purpose.

The BID and how it's run is somewhat confusing and we all make mistakes. But before a newspaper takes a position, it should make sure it's done its homework and acknowledges anything that could be perceived as a conflict of interest.

Also, the editorial cites the tree-lighting and Nostalgia Days events.

These events essentially pay for themselves through money raised outside of the BID fee, so they don't depend on the fees to exist.

The DNBA serves as a pass-through organization for both events (evident in the 2013 budget submitted to the city).

The bottom line is that these events can still take place if the BID fee is abolished.

I hope the IJ and its editorial board will take all of the above as constructive criticism and continue reporting on this issue so that the business owners in the BID, the people who actually fork over the BID tax every year, can make an informed decision about whether or not the BID should continue.

Carlos Castillo is owner of Loveable Rogue bookstore in Novato and an advocate for defunding the city's downtown Novato Business Improvement District.